Report Inappropriate Ads Here

[Kuma Da]

1.) Date and time ad was visible:

9:23, November 28, 2011

2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World):

USA

3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box):

Bottom box

4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic):

Advertisement banner not objectionable at all. Good production values, clean lines, etc. Site that banner links to is massively skeevy. It's framed like one of those "work-at-home-mom-makes-$40,000-in-a-week" banners, and is at the very least a pyramidal marketing scheme, if not seething with viruses. When you try to leave the page, it does one of those "do you really, really wanna leave" pop-ups. The site claims to be selling a subscription service to a compendium of information on how to instantly get hired to make bajillions of dollars testing video games that you wanted to play anyway, and is so enthusiastic about how easy this is as long as you pay them money for it.

While there may technically be some legitimate advice being offered here, the whole setup reeks of scam.

[Douglas]

4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic):

Advertisement banner not objectionable at all. Good production values, clean lines, etc. Site that banner links to is massively skeevy. It's framed like one of those "work-at-home-mom-makes-$40,000-in-a-week" banners, and is at the very least a pyramidal marketing scheme, if not seething with viruses. When you try to leave the page, it does one of those "do you really, really wanna leave" pop-ups. The site claims to be selling a subscription service to a compendium of information on how to instantly get hired to make bajillions of dollars testing video games that you wanted to play anyway, and is so enthusiastic about how easy this is as long as you pay them money for it.

While there may technically be some legitimate advice being offered here, the whole setup reeks of scam.

While you explained very well why the ad is objectionable, this doesn't describe the ad itself to help identify which ad it is.

Assuming it's still showing the same one (it seems to match with the "make bajillions testing video games" but with the rest of the description I don't want to click on it to check), it says "BECOME A GAME TESTER" and has a close-up of a face that would fit right in a Final Fantasy game on the right.

[The Giant]

Advertiser blocked.

And yes, a physical description of the ad itself (not the site the ad links to) is required. Color, text, description of images. Oftentimes, by the time I see an ad report, the advertiser has been outbid and it is not possible to search the bidders for "what was active at 9:23 AM," though I wish it was. I then need to dig through the list of Outbid Bids to find it, and there are usually 20-30 of those at any one time.

[Kuma Da]

Thank you, douglas and Giant. That was exactly the ad I meant.

I think the face was actually from a final fantasy game, since the site had a lot of screen-caps from big budget releases to try and shore up its claims. I'm glad it's been blocked.

[Zherog]

1.) Date and time ad was visible:

12:10pm EDT

2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World):

US

3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box):

Top box

4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic):

Text of the ad is "Free iPhone 4s." A quick click on the link and the site appears to be one of those scam survey sites that keeps you filling out surveys while dangling the "carrot" just out of your reach.

[Snowbody]

The "free iphone" ad links to:
http://value.snapdailydeals.net/Spla...&s=55628&se=52

[Mono Vertigo]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 30th November 2011, 23:50 (GMT+1)
2.) Region: Europe
3.) Location of ad: Top box
4.) Brief description of objectionable content: It's an ad for war-gamers.com, subtitled "What Happens When There's Nothing To Do In The Greatest Military In The World...", with two stick-figures talking. The objectionable content is a big nipple (as confirmed by the dialogue between the other characters) walking around the stick-figures. While I'm personally just weirded out and not offended, I am not certain that big nipple is SFW.
Weirdest thing I've written this month, enough Internet for me... until December in 5 minutes.

[Jeriah]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 30th November 2011, 18:21 (GMT-5)
2.) Region: US
3.) Location of ad: Top box
4.) Brief description of objectionable content:

It's an ad for war-gamers.com, subtitled "What Happens When There's Nothing To Do In The Greatest Military In The World...", with two stick-figures talking. The objectionable content is a big nipple (as confirmed by the dialogue between the other characters) walking around the stick-figures. While I'm personally just weirded out and not offended, I am not certain that big nipple is SFW.

Well, I found it disturbing and rather offensive.

[The Dark Fiddler]

I'm not entirely sure if the ad is objectionable, but I figure it's better to be safe than sorry? The way it seems to attempt to look like some official part of the forum makes me worried.

1.) Date and time ad was visible: November 30th, 6:30 PM Eastern
2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): USA
3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Bottom
4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): Ad is titled "Our Top Recommended Download" and is made of three boxes of three colors, the scheme matching that used by this very site. It also states "This is the perfect free alternative to microsoft office." Again, it may not actually be objectionable, and isn't NSFW, but the way it attempts to appear official is unsettling.

[Siosilvar]

I'm not entirely sure if the ad is objectionable, but I figure it's better to be safe than sorry? The way it seems to attempt to look like some official part of the forum makes me worried.

1.) Date and time ad was visible: November 30th, 6:30 PM Eastern
2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): USA
3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Bottom
4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): Ad is titled "Our Top Recommended Download" and is made of three boxes of three colors, the scheme matching that used by this very site. It also states "This is the perfect free alternative to microsoft office." Again, it may not actually be objectionable, and isn't NSFW, but the way it attempts to appear official is unsettling.

The link goes to a site that triggers a warning on my browser and attempts to present itself as the openoffice.org site. This is a scam site, no question about it.

EDIT: It also attempts to install malware on your computer.

[The Giant]

Text of the ad is "Free iPhone 4s." A quick click on the link and the site appears to be one of those scam survey sites that keeps you filling out surveys while dangling the "carrot" just out of your reach.

Advertiser blocked.

It's an ad for war-gamers.com, subtitled "What Happens When There's Nothing To Do In The Greatest Military In The World...", with two stick-figures talking. The objectionable content is a big nipple (as confirmed by the dialogue between the other characters) walking around the stick-figures. While I'm personally just weirded out and not offended, I am not certain that big nipple is SFW.

Ad rejected, but advertiser has not been blocked. I will send a message permitting them to bid with a less NSFW ad.

Ad is titled "Our Top Recommended Download" and is made of three boxes of three colors, the scheme matching that used by this very site. It also states "This is the perfect free alternative to microsoft office." Again, it may not actually be objectionable, and isn't NSFW, but the way it attempts to appear official is unsettling.

Advertiser blocked (but more for being a scam site than because they tried to match my color scheme).

[Loki_42]

Date and Time ad was visible: December 7th, 5:19 PM, Eastern
Region: USA and Europe
Location of ad: Bottom Box
Brief description: This ad may not actually be objectionable, but it's giving off scammy signals. The text reads "Like making gifs and watching videos? Get 100 dollars for watching this video" and shows a seemingly unrelated picture of a person standing in a kitchen. Like I said, just getting scammy vibes.

[The Giant]

I checked it out and it seems legit; the money is not for watching videos, but for doing actual work converting them. It leads to a tumblr account where the guy (pictured in the ad) runs a contest where he asks people to convert his YouTube stuff into animated gifs. He picks the best one and pays them for it. Sort of weird, but I don't get any inherent malware or scam signals.

Unless someone can give me more specific info that leads to this being an outright scam of some kind (or a dangerous site), I'm going to let it slide.

[Maxios]

Date and Time ad was visible: December 12th, 8:24 AM, Pacific
Region: USA
Location of ad: Bottom Box
Brief description: Shows a drawing of a man chasing three women in bikinis with his tongue out. To the right is a man holding a dog saying "And dogs are the ones who need leashes?"

Edit: I've looked at the site the ad leads to, and it's a relatively SFW webcomic.

[The Giant]

Sexist (both ways), but no action taken.

[Yuki Akuma]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 16th Dexember, 14:26 GMT
2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): Europe
3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Top box
4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): An ad for the webcomic "Greg" which involves a pair of adventurers and a Medusa. In the first panel, the Medusa mentions that she's naked from head to toe, and in the next, the two adventurers are staring at her (as statues).

[The Giant]

I can't find this bid in my data from PW, so unfortunately no action taken. If it comes back, I reserve the right to block it depending on my own view of the ad.

But I will say that reporting every ad with a potential sexual innuendo or reference is not the intended purpose of this thread. The joke being mentioned doesn't sound like it would be out of place in OOTS itself, depending on the framing of the panels and the artwork. I think a joke that amounts to, "Hey, sometimes men like to look at naked women," is just about as tame a sexual reference as you can manage, as long as the image didn't actually depict any naked women in it.

[Porthos]

I can't find this bid in my data from PW, so unfortunately no action taken. If it comes back, I reserve the right to block it depending on my own view of the ad.

So you don't have to wait 'till it appears again, the webad is a resized to fit in a banner ad sized window of this comic.

(DISCLAIMER: I am not affiliated in any way shape or form with Greg)

[The Giant]

Yeah, OK, then. Having seen it now, I have to reiterate my verdict on the previous ad of, "Sexist, but no action taken."

[Eledragon]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 4:46 PM, 12/25
2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): USA
3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Top
4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): Banner labeled "Switchblade Goddess by Lucy A. Snyder" and has a review which says "Snyder injects this edgy urban fantasy with an erotic charge"

[Zherog]

And... what's objectionable about it?

It links to an Amazon page for a novel named, oddly enough, "Switchblade Goddess" by an author named Lucy Snider. The novel is published by a reputable fantasy paperback publisher (Del Rey).

[Eledragon]

I merely thought mentioning "erotic charge" might be against the forum rules.

[Acanous]

Methinks maybe there should be some definition in the opening post about what constitutes inappropriate.
Obviously, Malware, Scam sites, offensive language and nudity (Shown, not implied) are appropriate reasons for taking down an ad, but things like the medusa gag shouldn't bear mention.

[The Giant]

I merely thought mentioning "erotic charge" might be against the forum rules.

It's not. No action taken.

[happyturtle]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: Jan 2, 12
2.) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): Europe
3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Top
4.) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): Guilded Age - animated ad

[NerfTW]

One would think the phrase "Become a huge douche" would also be offensive.

[The Giant]

I don't care so much about the "huge douche" line, but animation is not allowed. Bid canceled, but the advertiser has not been blocked from bidding again with a non-animated ad.

[AtlanteanTroll]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 7:54 PM, January 4, 2012

2:) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): USA

3:) 3.) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Bottom

4:) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): See for yourself.

SCRUBBED. Please describe the content, don't give the advertiser a free second view of their ad.

[The Giant]

Bid canceled, per our "No discussion of religions" rule.

[Cristo Meyers]

1.) Date and time ad was visible: 01/05/2012 2:13 pm

2:) Region (Pick one: USA, Canada, Europe, or Rest of the World): USA

3:) Location of ad (Top box or bottom box): Top

4:) Brief description of objectionable content (including a name or other identifying characteristic): "Death of the Mobile?" It's an ad for a "Free presentation" about the mobile market/stock market. Most likely a scam site.